RAM KUMAR PATHAK v. STATE OF U.P.THR.SECY SECOND EDUCATION AND 6 ORS
WRIA/6045/2007 · 2025-03-19
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141504 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141504 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15905 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6045 of 2007 Petitioner :- Ram Kumar Pathak Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thr.Secy Second Education And 6 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Pt S Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Pt. S. Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. However, no one has appeared on behalf of the opposite party Nos.6 & 7.
2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties to pay the salary to the petitioner as Assistant Teacher, LT Grade (Science & Maths) in Nagrik Inter College, Shrawasti. (b) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties to pay the arrears of salary along with appropriate interest. (c) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties to regularize the petitioner on the post of LT Grade Teacher (Science & Maths)."
3. Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has informed that counter affidavit on behalf of the State has been filed, but no rejoinder affidavit has been filed. He has also submitted that the specific stand has been taken in paras-10 and 11 of the counter affidavit that for making payment of salary to the petitioner, the Committee of Management would be liable and not the State Government, but
learned counsel for the petitioner has disputed the aforesaid fact.
4. However, Pt. S. Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that any appropriate decision may be taken by the Competent Authority and that decision may be intimated to the petitioner, as at this stage, he would not address the case on merits.
5. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, the liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the opposite party No.3 to prefer a fresh representation taking all pleas and grounds which are available with him and copy thereof may be preferred to the opposite party No.6 i.e. the Committee of Management of Nagrik Inter College, Amwa, Shrawasti within a period of two weeks from today and if such representation is preferred by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the opposite party No.3 may pass appropriate speaking and reasoned order, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order along with representation and decision thereof may be intimated to the petitioner forthwith.
6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench